SHREEVED FOUNDATION,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-1, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

ITA 731/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 June 2026AY 2025-267 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that quasi-judicial authorities should decide issues on merits and that a mere reference to a wrong provision or a minor delay should not lead to the dismissal of an application. The principle of substantial compliance should be applied, allowing the assessee an opportunity to rectify mistakes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for regular approval under Section 80G(5) was rejected by the CIT(E) primarily due to a delay in filing and an error in mentioning the relevant provision of law. The assessee argued that their Section 12A application was allowed despite a delay, and the error was a technical non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether a rejection of an application for 80G approval solely on technical grounds like delay or incorrect provision citation is justified. Whether the principle of substantial compliance applies to procedural requirements for such applications.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5),Section 12A,Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, CA
For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Hearing: 16.06.2026Pronounced: 19.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) (for short, “CIT(E)”), dated 29/09/2025 whereby application for regular approval under Section 80G(5) of the Act has been rejected.

2.

On hearing both sides, we find that the impugned order has been passed by Ld. Prescribed Authority for the reason that there was delay in filing the application. Ld. Counsel has pointed out that condoning the delay, assessee’s application under Section 12A stands allowed by the Prescribed Authority vide order dated 29.09.2025. 3. On hearing both the sides, we find that the impugned order has been passed by Ld. Prescribed Authority obs

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)

All 2,236 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →